Tank Stance/Shirk - Get rid of it.

[Covenant]

Its about time. There are many reasons, firstly at start of dungeon having activate is annoying. Secondly, there is no longer a need to Tank Stance with Enimity/Def up/Attack down. Thirdly, multi-tank run arent really a thing anymore.

IF you want to bring back Tank Stance to buff/Debuff again, I'll listen.

Enimity Mitigation can be handle with Shirk. Decrease recast time and that's solve the issue.

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

How about we STOP asking removals and folding whole concepts into a single button? Especially for bullsh** reasoning like "it is annoying having to press it at the start of the dungeon"?

Multi tank setups exist, they are called raids. Enmity management exists, but depends on the content you do. Dropping stance is a useful tool if you want to fine tune enmity without having to dump Shirk if you want to use it for a later mech but otherwise risk overaggroing.

It also sets apart the pulling tank from the other, good luck finding this out without a buff and no verbal communication.

Like you offer the actual solution already - make something with the stance. But stop asking for removal, this is utterly unproductive.

[CKNovel]

Shirk doesn't work in 24 man raid.

If tank can't drop the stance, boss targeting would become a Russian roulette.
There's also content that allows multiple tanks such as deep dungeon, Eureka and Bozja.

[Ransu]

Its about time. There are many reasons, firstly at start of dungeon having activate is annoying. Secondly, there is no longer a need to Tank Stance with Enimity/Def up/Attack down. Thirdly, multi-tank run arent really a thing anymore.

IF you want to bring back Tank Stance to buff/Debuff again, I'll listen.

Enimity Mitigation can be handle with Shirk. Decrease recast time and that's solve the issue.

So basically you have never done extreme/savage/ultimate content? lol

[Covenant]

It's like people can't read. Shirk has a long recast. Shorten it and off tanks can just drop aggro faster. I have done end game raid, and still thought the same thing. Old tank stance made much more sense when it affected you with defense buff/attack down, versus attack up/ def down.
SquareEnix got rid of "stances" because low skill players couldn't manage it well. I'm just encourage the simplifications further. I actually enjoying the skill with switching stances...old style.

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

It's like people can't read. Shirk has a long recast. Shorten it and off tanks can just drop aggro faster. I have done end game raid, and still thought the same thing. Old tank stance made much more sense when it affected you with defense buff/attack down, versus attack up/ def down.
SquareEnix got rid of "stances" because low skill players couldn't manage it well. I'm just encourage the simplifications further. I actually enjoying the skill with switching stances...old style.

No, your take is just luke warm if not cold.

Even if you shortened Shirk to something like 30s like provoke to deal with unbriddled enmity building and having room to use it for mechanics, you'd essentially just dumb down what little we have left in enmity as a mechanic even further.

The current system is intuitive enough. Want aggro, take stance. Don't want it, toggle it off. Can't Shirk but need to ensure your enmity wont overtake the co tank? Toggle it off.

Discounting ranged attacks, we have only three buttons to handle everything about enmity, there is zero reason to change what we have now other than to kill off a tank's final underutilized braincell.

You are both saying that you've liked the older style of stances, yet encourage what is left of them to be dumpstered even further. You are literally sending opposite messages with opposite suggestions to introduce change for change's sake.

[Ransu]

It's like people can't read. Shirk has a long recast. Shorten it and off tanks can just drop aggro faster. I have done end game raid, and still thought the same thing. Old tank stance made much more sense when it affected you with defense buff/attack down, versus attack up/ def down.
SquareEnix got rid of "stances" because low skill players couldn't manage it well. I'm just encourage the simplifications further. I actually enjoying the skill with switching stances...old style.

Instead of a simple tank stance you're essentially placing shirk and provoke into a rotation which just creates a headache for both tanks because both will be constantly creating equal threat and will need to deal with it by spamming voke and shirk making tank swaps a massive chore. Forget statics.... God help the pug groups with two tanks fighting even more over who is the main tank.

[Absurdity]

Instead of a simple tank stance you're essentially placing shirk and provoke into a rotation which just creates a headache for both tanks because both will be constantly creating equal threat and will need to deal with it by spamming voke and shirk making tank swaps a massive chore. Forget statics.... God help the pug groups with two tanks fighting even more over who is the main tank.

The other issue is what if you simply deal significantly more damage than your co-tank to the point that you creep up on their enmity even after a voke+shirk tank swap?

Because I've had that happen in savage before but I could simply drop my tank stance for a while to make it a non-issue. I most certainly don't want a scenario where I simply die because I don't have any tools as a tank to manage my own threat outside of the occasional shirk.

[Noox-115]

Unpopular opinion : I would like Tanks to have an Enmity Generation combo like they used to. I know it will sound dumb for a lot of people but I always love to have more combos to spice the fight a bit more beside it would split tanks and blue dps. But sadly they wanna make the game easy for everyone truly a shame.

[SerophisRagnarok]

okay then by this logic we need to also get rid of Summoning carbie/fairy, Kardia, Dance Partner, etc. just hit the button dude. jeez.